Transformers 3: Dark Of The Moon (7/1/11)
- Thread starter FoolKiller
- 209 comments
- 41,680 views
Question:
I dont' know much about the plot, only that there is a struggle between Decepticons and Autobots who are with the side of humans. Also, I'm not a fan of Megan Fox. I study Marketing and at the moment product placement.
Can I still enjoy the flick?
And... 3D or no 3D?
Thanks.
I dont' know much about the plot, only that there is a struggle between Decepticons and Autobots who are with the side of humans. Also, I'm not a fan of Megan Fox. I study Marketing and at the moment product placement.
Can I still enjoy the flick?
And... 3D or no 3D?
Thanks.
- 33,155
- Hammerhead Garage
Megan Fox was originally slated to appear, but was dropped by Michael Bay. There have also been several crew changes; Alex Kurtzmann and Robert Orci - who penned the first two films - have not written the thid. Instead, Ehren Kruger (a self-professed Transformers die-hard) had been brought in after serving as script doctor on REVENGE OF THE FALLEN. But don't worry, script doctors don't do too much, so REVENGE's poor script was mostly down to Kurtzmann and Orci.
Not much is known about the plot, other than that it revolves around the origins of the space and arms race; in the world of the film, Apollo 11 had a second, secretive objective: to survey a crashed alien relic - a Cybertronian spacecraft - on the dark side of the moon. What they found was kept secret from the world and even the Autobots for forty years. The secrets of that discovery are pivotal in deciding who wins the war between the Autobots and the Decepticons. The trailer shows the crash site on the moon as a staging point for the invasion of earth. Bay says they've emphasised the whole mystery aspect of the plot.
And yes, there is product placement. A lot of the cars are made by GM, and a lot of the vehicles that get destoryed are likely to be made by other companies. There is, however, talk of some diversity this time around, including a Ferrari 458 and Mercedes W212. And while scenes were filmed for those bloody annoying little eight-year-old Autobots, they've apparently been dropped from the final cut of the film.
Not much is known about the plot, other than that it revolves around the origins of the space and arms race; in the world of the film, Apollo 11 had a second, secretive objective: to survey a crashed alien relic - a Cybertronian spacecraft - on the dark side of the moon. What they found was kept secret from the world and even the Autobots for forty years. The secrets of that discovery are pivotal in deciding who wins the war between the Autobots and the Decepticons. The trailer shows the crash site on the moon as a staging point for the invasion of earth. Bay says they've emphasised the whole mystery aspect of the plot.
And yes, there is product placement. A lot of the cars are made by GM, and a lot of the vehicles that get destoryed are likely to be made by other companies. There is, however, talk of some diversity this time around, including a Ferrari 458 and Mercedes W212. And while scenes were filmed for those bloody annoying little eight-year-old Autobots, they've apparently been dropped from the final cut of the film.
- 36,079
- Addison,Texas
- GTP_RACECAR
Thank goodness, I would not have been able to stand those two things for another movie.
- 10,849
- Belgium
- bramturismo
The special effects in that trailer just look mind-blowing! Even though the first 2 were crap and I'm expecting the third one to be the same, I'm looking forward to it just because of the special effects!
- 5,833
- Right behind you
- SRV2NV
Special effects are the only thing going for the series so far, IMO.
I honestly hope that someone comes along and re-does the Transformers sometime soon, and leaves this Bay crap behind.
I agree with everything FK has said in this thread, Bay has done to the Transformers what Spielberg and Lucas did to Indiana Jones. đź‘Ž
I honestly hope that someone comes along and re-does the Transformers sometime soon, and leaves this Bay crap behind.
I agree with everything FK has said in this thread, Bay has done to the Transformers what Spielberg and Lucas did to Indiana Jones. đź‘Ž
- 6,719
- Mexico City
- MoLieG
... but I'm going to see the movie anyway...
- 33,155
- Hammerhead Garage
Created it? After all, Spielberg and Lucas created RAIDERS OF THE LOST ARK, one of the greatest films of all time ...
- 5,833
- Right behind you
- SRV2NV
Yeah, I know. Even Temple of Doom was a great movie, and I thank them for it. Then after 20 years they decided to invite him over for supper, spike his drink and butt raped him for 2 hours on film for everyone to see. South Park pretty much nailed it with their episode.
Bay is basically doing the same thing to the Transformers universe. He's changing things for no reason other than his personal taste and turning what could have been an amazing movie franchise, into a running internet gag.
- 33,155
- Hammerhead Garage
He openly disliked REVENGE OF THE FALLEN. Audiences and critics openly disliked REVENGE OF THE FALLEN. So how is it a) a flight of fancy and b) anything other than giving fans what the wat to go changing things for DARK OF THE MOON?
- 24,553
- Frankfort, KY
- GTP_FoolKiller
- FoolKiller1979
Bay did not create Transformers. Like I have always said, the Bay movies are movies about sentient robots in a civil war, but it is not the Transformers I recognize.
Something like that. I am pretty sure when the police busted in at the end they were doing the same to a storm trooper.
I believe that Dolph Lundgren did the same thing to He-Man.
- 33,155
- Hammerhead Garage
Ain't It Cool News posted an early review a while ago. I'll spoilerise it because it contains plot details, but the general vibe of the review is that the film works because it's not afraid to be dark when it has to. Most films flirt with darkness before pulling their characters back in time to save them; from the sounds of things, DARK OF THE MOON pushes its characters over the edge to see what happens next - which is always a sign of good storytelling.
The long and the short of it is that this is apparently Bay's best film, and the entire script is strong enough to lend credibility to the idea of films based on toys. Judging by this clip, Shia LaBeouf is actually going to do a pretty good job. I think it really highlights why I didn't like him; until now, he's sounded like a man trying to play a teenager, which gives his voice a grating, nasal quality. Here, he sounds like an adult. And while the pubescent banter is still in there ("Nicknames. That's fun."), how many people do you know who suddenly and completely changed their sense of humour once they accepted adulthood?
Skids and Mudflap have also defiantely been removed, and Wheelie and "other streetwise teenagers" (so, teenagers, then) have been toned down.
We already know that the film centres around the discovery of a Cybertronian spacecraft on the moon. It was sent by Sentinel Prime - Optimus' predecessor - when he realised that the war on Cybertron was not going to end well for the Autobots. The craft contained technology that would have enabled to Cybertronians to survive on their own and start over on a new planet until it crashed on the moon. This information was kept secret, even from the Autobots when they arrived on earth.
The film proceeds to tie several historical events into its plot. The entire space race was centred around investigating the crashed ship. The accident at Chernobyl was actually an experiment with something retrieved from the wreckage, and the Sarcophagus was actually designed to improsion Shockwave. And so on and so forth.
When DARK OF THE MOON begins, the status quo has the Autobots as an established part of American military strategy, whilst there are only a handful of Decepticons about, and most of them in bad shape (Megatron is said to look especially creepy). This leads to Chicago getting invaded; the review doesn't make it clear how this happens, but I'd hazard a guess to say the Decpeticons find out about the cache on the moon and put the call out, realising that they too can be saved by it. What the review does make clear is that Chicago gets invaded, and it's it's done incredibly well.
The film proceeds to tie several historical events into its plot. The entire space race was centred around investigating the crashed ship. The accident at Chernobyl was actually an experiment with something retrieved from the wreckage, and the Sarcophagus was actually designed to improsion Shockwave. And so on and so forth.
When DARK OF THE MOON begins, the status quo has the Autobots as an established part of American military strategy, whilst there are only a handful of Decepticons about, and most of them in bad shape (Megatron is said to look especially creepy). This leads to Chicago getting invaded; the review doesn't make it clear how this happens, but I'd hazard a guess to say the Decpeticons find out about the cache on the moon and put the call out, realising that they too can be saved by it. What the review does make clear is that Chicago gets invaded, and it's it's done incredibly well.
Skids and Mudflap have also defiantely been removed, and Wheelie and "other streetwise teenagers" (so, teenagers, then) have been toned down.
- 24,553
- Frankfort, KY
- GTP_FoolKiller
- FoolKiller1979
Why do I hear laughter coming from the Director's Guild offices?
- 33,155
- Hammerhead Garage
- 24,553
- Frankfort, KY
- GTP_FoolKiller
- FoolKiller1979
May I offer a word of caution?
You did compare a shot from a trailer for Revenge of the Fallen to David Fincher in the lead up to that one. But we also didn't have as much praise in reviews, even though the early reviews for Fallen were positive. I believe the phrase, "Bay appears to have grown as a filmmaker" was used.
- 33,155
- Hammerhead Garage
Oh, he grew. Just sort of tumour-like.
And for all the rubbish in that film, there was some decent stuff. The forest fight in particular is cited as a highlight. That was actually a pretty technically-precise sequence.
Besides, I'd rather be enthusiastic and get disappointed by it instead of being cynical and proven right.
And for all the rubbish in that film, there was some decent stuff. The forest fight in particular is cited as a highlight. That was actually a pretty technically-precise sequence.
Besides, I'd rather be enthusiastic and get disappointed by it instead of being cynical and proven right.
- 24,553
- Frankfort, KY
- GTP_FoolKiller
- FoolKiller1979
- 33,155
- Hammerhead Garage
Megan Fox wasn't written out of the film. Steven Spielberg fired her after she referred to Michael Bay as 'Hitler on-set'.
- 3,279
- UK
- GTP_VEXD
I am going to go into it with great anticipation of some huge robots fighting each other, some massive invasion scenes, some fit birds, and seeing Shockwave for the first time in ages.
Then I will plunder amazon for toys, and add them to my ridiculous collection of things a 34 year old shouldn't be making excuses for buying.
They're just so cool to fold and unfold.
Well some of them.
I already found a load of them in various shops here in the UK, and I haven't bought one relating to DOTM yet, as they kind of changed complexity, and went for much easier to transform, which doesn't appeal to me, as I preferred the ROTF figures which have some insane difficulty levels for toys designed for kids.
When I went to see Fast and Furious 5, I wasn't expecting Vin to win an oscar, I was expecting to laff my ass off at the incredulity of it all.
Which I did.
Almost straight away when the bus rolled after braking hard.
When I go to see DOTM, I will be expecting to throw my brain out at the entrance, enjoy all the cool changing robot thingies that I will find in shops in the coming months, and maybe see some Rosie-huntington-smyth-chomondley-warner-Whiteley-ass. In 3D.
Who gives a monkies if it's a pants film compared to Good Morning Vietnam.
It's not supposed to be anything other than WWF for robot fans.
I can't wait.
Excuse me.
đź‘Ť
Then I will plunder amazon for toys, and add them to my ridiculous collection of things a 34 year old shouldn't be making excuses for buying.
They're just so cool to fold and unfold.
Well some of them.
I already found a load of them in various shops here in the UK, and I haven't bought one relating to DOTM yet, as they kind of changed complexity, and went for much easier to transform, which doesn't appeal to me, as I preferred the ROTF figures which have some insane difficulty levels for toys designed for kids.
When I went to see Fast and Furious 5, I wasn't expecting Vin to win an oscar, I was expecting to laff my ass off at the incredulity of it all.
Which I did.
Almost straight away when the bus rolled after braking hard.
When I go to see DOTM, I will be expecting to throw my brain out at the entrance, enjoy all the cool changing robot thingies that I will find in shops in the coming months, and maybe see some Rosie-huntington-smyth-chomondley-warner-Whiteley-ass. In 3D.
Who gives a monkies if it's a pants film compared to Good Morning Vietnam.
It's not supposed to be anything other than WWF for robot fans.
I can't wait.
Excuse me.
đź‘Ť
- 15,534
- Cairo, Egypt
- GTP_SEMS
The IGN review states this is the best Transformers yet,with really high praise for the invasion Scenes .Will definetley go now.
... I'm expecting another high-profit movie with nothing but explotions... 
- 36,079
- Addison,Texas
- GTP_RACECAR
- 33,155
- Hammerhead Garage
The general critical consensus so far is that it's better than REVENGE OF THE FALLEN, but that Michael Bay pretty much just had to fart on celluloid to beat it. Having read a few of the reviews, I think a lot of critics are still punishing both Bay and the franchise for the previous film. Which isn't really fair, since Bay himself said they were going into DARK OF THE MOON looking to address the failures of REVENGE.
- 33,155
- Hammerhead Garage
Well, I saw it today. Just to be careful, I'll put my impressions in spoilers.
A final note: when it comes to REVENGE and MOON, if you've seen one, you've seen both. MOON is by far the stronger of the two, but it just can't match the first film as it squanders its plot. That doesn't mean you shouldn't see it, but there's nothing here you haven't seen before (except Leonard Nimoy). I think a lot of people will happily take MOON and forget REVENGE ever existed, which is more than a fair trade. But to be perfectly honest, the trailer for Mission: Impossible - Ghost Protocol got me more excited than MOON did.
6.5/10
If anything, DARK OF THE MOON (I'm just going to call it MOON from now on) is like the HIGHLANDER films. The first HIGHLANDER film was a cult classic, about immortal warriors in the Scottish highlands. Like the first TRANSFORMERS film, it wasn't the greatest film in the world, but it made no attempts at being high art. And like REVENGE OF THE FALLEN (I'm now just calling it REVENGE), HIGHLANDER 2: THE QUICKENING, absolutely sucked. If you thought REVENGE made no sense, watch THE QUICKENING and try and tell me what happens. In fact, THE QUICKENING was so bad that when HIGHLANDER 3 was made, it completely ignored the events of THE QUICKENING. Again, it wasn't the greatest film in the world, but it realised nothing could save the trainwreck whilst keeping the dignity of the first one intact.
MOON is a lot like HIGHLANDER 3. It pretty much ignores REVENGE. Ideas and concepts that came up in REVENGE - namely, the Matrix of Leadership - get their own exposition here, so you don't need to see REVENGE to understand it. Ironically enough, MOON follows many of the plot points of REVENGE. This is not necessarily a bad thing because Michael Bay is almost apologising for it. I very much got the sense that MOON is REVENGE, only done properly this time. It does this with an interesting hook: that the US-Soviet space race was a pretext for investigating a downed alien spacecraft (which would make a great basic story for any film, really). It's an excellent story device, but MOON never really knows what to do with it. The first half of the film revolves around the mystery of this find, but the story is perpetually broken up by characters that we don't care about doing things that mean nothing. The second half of the film is basically just shooting and things blowing up Chicago.
MOON's biggest mistake is in thinking that there was only one thing wrong with REVENGE. It threads a story that should be interesting into the mix, but ignores everything else that REVENGE did wrong. This is a problem that can be traced back to the first film, where the Allspark was established as the last hope of the Cybertronians' survival. But then REVENGE had the Sun Harvester as the last hope of survival. And now MOON does it with "the Pillars". They're really just MacGuffins, but by the time they come into play, the story has stopped and they're not enough to drive the action on their own - especially since their importance is over-emphasised, which means they're not really MacGuffins at all. A MacGuffin is soemthing that can be anything from the means to save a civilisation at the expense of another to a pint of Guiness without impacting the story too much, but I just can't see the Autobots and Decepticons going to war over a pint of stout.
Overall, the first half of the film is the strongest. And if they had stripped out some of the zany characters (seriously, four people were basically playing the same character - leave it to Alan Tudyk, who knows how to play crazy in an endearing way ... and make a few Alpha from "Dollhouse" jokes, because that's basically who he is here) and the unintersting romantic stuff and let the story drive the film. And keep the action relative: the stakes might be higher this time around, but that doesn't mean the action has to be. The giant earthworm Decepticon ravaging a skyscraper might look impressive in the trailers, but it's bookended by half a dozen other action scenes, and it all becomes redundant.
MOON is a lot like HIGHLANDER 3. It pretty much ignores REVENGE. Ideas and concepts that came up in REVENGE - namely, the Matrix of Leadership - get their own exposition here, so you don't need to see REVENGE to understand it. Ironically enough, MOON follows many of the plot points of REVENGE. This is not necessarily a bad thing because Michael Bay is almost apologising for it. I very much got the sense that MOON is REVENGE, only done properly this time. It does this with an interesting hook: that the US-Soviet space race was a pretext for investigating a downed alien spacecraft (which would make a great basic story for any film, really). It's an excellent story device, but MOON never really knows what to do with it. The first half of the film revolves around the mystery of this find, but the story is perpetually broken up by characters that we don't care about doing things that mean nothing. The second half of the film is basically just shooting and things blowing up Chicago.
MOON's biggest mistake is in thinking that there was only one thing wrong with REVENGE. It threads a story that should be interesting into the mix, but ignores everything else that REVENGE did wrong. This is a problem that can be traced back to the first film, where the Allspark was established as the last hope of the Cybertronians' survival. But then REVENGE had the Sun Harvester as the last hope of survival. And now MOON does it with "the Pillars". They're really just MacGuffins, but by the time they come into play, the story has stopped and they're not enough to drive the action on their own - especially since their importance is over-emphasised, which means they're not really MacGuffins at all. A MacGuffin is soemthing that can be anything from the means to save a civilisation at the expense of another to a pint of Guiness without impacting the story too much, but I just can't see the Autobots and Decepticons going to war over a pint of stout.
Overall, the first half of the film is the strongest. And if they had stripped out some of the zany characters (seriously, four people were basically playing the same character - leave it to Alan Tudyk, who knows how to play crazy in an endearing way ... and make a few Alpha from "Dollhouse" jokes, because that's basically who he is here) and the unintersting romantic stuff and let the story drive the film. And keep the action relative: the stakes might be higher this time around, but that doesn't mean the action has to be. The giant earthworm Decepticon ravaging a skyscraper might look impressive in the trailers, but it's bookended by half a dozen other action scenes, and it all becomes redundant.
6.5/10
- 4,087
- Tallinn
Watched this movie at the cinema today.
Can't say much about the story. It has some powerful moments.
The scenes are full of close ups and action. And Obama xD
With each new Transformers movie, they are showing more gore.
Remember how in the first movie there were practically no human deaths (at least they were not shown), but in the third movie they actually show human bodies desintegrate from Decepticon fire. Burned bones too. Transformers now bleed too.
The moon cover up was interesting and the strange deaths of people who knew about the "dark side of the moon".
Who knows what was that silver concept car? Is it a new Dodge Viper or another concept by Chevy?
I don't watch many movies, so this one was epic for me. I was impressed.
The scenes are full of close ups and action. And Obama xD
With each new Transformers movie, they are showing more gore.
Remember how in the first movie there were practically no human deaths (at least they were not shown), but in the third movie they actually show human bodies desintegrate from Decepticon fire. Burned bones too. Transformers now bleed too.
The moon cover up was interesting and the strange deaths of people who knew about the "dark side of the moon".
Who knows what was that silver concept car? Is it a new Dodge Viper or another concept by Chevy?
I don't watch many movies, so this one was epic for me. I was impressed.
